He states that it is not dull then describes the scenery of car doors, broken glass and parked vehicles which he sees on his journey to ‘The Times’. He then goes on to talk about bicycle crime, and gives a figure of “150,000 are stolen in Britain each year,” and moans about a £20 spot fine for cycling on pavements. We can see that this article is written from his own experiences. The line “I invite the Home Secretary to join me on a bike trip,” shows that he is not trying to discourage people from cycling, he is just trying to get the government to change its policies about cycle routes.
He then talks about Austria where last week he fearlessly went on a bike ride. He also states that most public transport systems in Europe and the USA have places allocated to store your bicycle. He then quotes some figures to back up his case. He shows that there are more bikes than cars in Britain, but only 1.7% of all journeys are taken by bicycle, and over ten years, 4% less children cycle to school.
He then goes on to talk about how Britain is car friendly and anti-bicycle, giving personal experiences from his son’s school and accusing the councils of trying to obtain “green kudos” by building inferior bike lanes. He then talks about a ‘National Cycle Network’, but undermines it by saying that hardly any of the routes will be through cities. He concludes with his view as to what the problem is. He believes it is money and believes that it will cost £43.5million to build safe bike routes throughout the country. His concluding line is taken from a personal experience and describes cars as “thundering juggernauts brushing our right elbows.”
c. The leaflet, ‘Bike For Your Life’ and the article ‘Bike Friendly? It’s All Uphill’, were written by people from two different backgrounds. The leaflet is from a company whose job it is to get people into cycling whereas the article is from a man who always cycles and gives his personal opinions.
Both pieces suggest that the authors are regular users of bicycles, however they write with different purposes. The leaflet is supposed to encourage people to begin cycling; ‘bribing’ them with facts that state that their athletic lives will be improved. The article was not written to disrespect cycling, however it was written to challenge the councils, government and Home Secretary. This article gives the reasons why people do not cycle and blames the people who he believes to be responsible for all of this. It was written to create awareness of what a typical bike ride through London is like. The leaflet was professionally produced, with no colloquialisms used. It is written in perfect English and does not contain long adjectives with the purpose that everyone will be able to understand it.
The article contains colloquialisms, abbreviations, long adjectives and metaphors. The author uses words such as ‘ain’t’ and ‘derision’ in the same article. This is not so that it would appeal to different readers; it is because this is a personal opinion and so is written in the same way as the author talks. He also refers to cars as ‘juggernauts’ and cyclists as ‘Lycra loonies’.
The leaflet seems to be full of facts as is constantly talks about how cycling will give you a better lifestyle, however it does not state any source for this information, so it could all be made up.
It also does not contain any figures, which suggests that the benefits may be minute. The article from ‘The Times’ is written from personal opinions; most of these are backed up with facts and figures. Some figures even include sources, so they are seen as reliable. The article can also sway in two different directions at times, from humorous sarcasm to an angry tone of frustration.
The leaflet was produced on a computer with many colours as if to attract people towards it. This method could not be used in the article as it was published in ‘The Times’ newspaper which is all in black and white, and all articles are split up into three columns down the page.
Section B
2. Take a look around the school and see how many people are overweight. This problem is on the increase and could be reduced if more was to be done in school to improve the health and fitness of pupils.
First off, the variety of food available in the canteen is disgraceful. Pizza, bacon, burgers and chips. These are the most popular choices of food from the canteen for pupils at either recess or lunchtime; however they all contain a tremendous amount of fat and grease. The only low-fat meal available in school is sandwiches; however these can hardly fill anybody up, leaving people who want to stay slim, hungry.
The price of sandwiches in school is disgraceful. Students and pupils are attracted to buy such fatty foods as they are cheaper and fill them up much more. If you want sandwiches inside school, it is cheaper to buy a loaf of bread from ‘Tesco’ and create your own. This way you save money and get a lot more to eat. It now seems obvious that a major cause of the cost of staying underweight in school. The typical price of a single sandwich is one pound. If the student’s and pupil’s health is to be improved, the cost of sandwiches should be lowered, more should be provided and the cost of fatty foods should be increased. This way, the canteen will not lose out on funds. Another factor is P.E. lessons. Each student has only one Physical Education and one Games lesson per week. If the student is lazy or busy and does no other exercise outside of school, then this means that he only exercises twice a week.
In order to overcome this problem, more P.E. and Games lessons should be added to the school timetable, even if it means hiring more staff, or lengthening the school day. A longer school day will not seem so bad when your body is covered in bulging muscles! In the event that new staff cannot be hired, then theory lessons should take place. Biology teachers would be able to teach a theory P.E. lesson, which would inform the students as to how they should exercise, how often, what they should eat, et cetera.
Also, the courts are often too crowded which disables students from indulging in physical activity either before school, recess, lunchtime or after school. All students should be allowed out into Aston Park in order to overcome this problem. Many other schools allow their students to go wherever they want at lunchtime. If students were allowed into the park, then more football matches and other physical activities would be able to take place. The problem of attacks, muggings, assaults and robberies would disappear due to the sheer amount of students out and about. Nobody would be stupid enough to start attacking somebody from this school when a hundred other students are there, ready to help him.
Another problem with school is the chairs that are used. The chairs in school allow and somewhat encourage students not to sit up straight. The chairs in the library are especially culprits of this as they contain cushioned padding. All chairs in school should either be produced solely from wood, or all chairs should be replaced by stools. It is a well known fact that your body accumulates fat if you do not sit up straight. Also, students should not remind this replacement as they are at school to work, not relax, and it is all being done for their benefit.
Physical Education should be made less boring. Students get tired of doing the same activity each week and it gets to be like a chore for them. In able to discourage this, the activities that students participate in should be rotated each week so that they do not get bored of doing it. Also, Physical Education should be made more fun by bringing celebrities of sport into school once in a while. Who would not be encouraged to play football with David Beckham or cricket with Sachin Tendulkar? With these personalities present, students would be encouraged to stay and take their lessons instead of wagging them in the library or going home on the bus as soon as they get to ‘Power League’.
Religious Education. This is a compulsory GCSE subject; however a GCSE in Religious Education will be of little use to anyone. In these modern times, the number of people following a religion is vastly decreasing. This is a known fact as less than 5% of the World’s population regularly attend a place of worship. The GCSE in RE will hardly impress an employer, unless you want to become a vicar, which most people do not. I propose that the compulsory GCSE in Religious Education be scrapped and replaced with Physical Education. People would still be able to take RE if they desired. They would be able to choose it as an option in the same way that people can choose Physical Education at this current moment in time.
If Physical Education was compulsory, students would indulge in a lot more exercise, learn more theory about Physical Education and would have a GCSE that is worth putting on their Curriculum Vitae. As you can see, it is beneficial all around.
